Re: Two essays on the violence seemingly inherent in Islam

From: Alex F. Bokov (
Date: Tue Oct 23 2001 - 10:04:01 MDT


On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Samantha Atkins wrote:

> I couldn't read the first url. The second is full of mere
> opinions, mostly under-informed and unschooled in Islam and
> comparative religion. Both are irrelevant to the simple fact
> that starting a war against the world's most populous religion
> as such is a very direct way to destroy almost all hope of
> acheiving our vaunted extropian dreams. The amount of sheer
> terror, death and human suffering likely to ensue from any such
> serious attempt is beyond calm consideration. It is not a mere
> intellectual exercise. Anti-Islam is no more tenable and no
> more a mere intellectual question than anti-semitism. I beg of
> all intelligent, caring people to not go down this path. It is
> deadly dangerous.

This might be true. So basically, Islam has spread to SO many people
that it may be impossible to do anything about it. On the other hand,
there were times and places where Christianity was even more
ubiquitous and as ruthless, yet there were people who stood up to it
and prevailed (more often in their legacy than in person).

Hypothetically, what if there was a religion (not Islam, a
hypothetical religion that doesn't exist at all in our timeline)
diametrically opposed to the liberal, secular, rational, humanist,
egalitarian values. Would it be acceptable for us to regard this
religion as a problem rather than as a valid point of view, much like
we regard bigotry and hatred as problems rather than as opinions?

Have we arrived at a paradox?

- --
* I believe that the majority of the world's Muslims are good, *
* honorable people. If you are a Muslim and want to reassure me and *
* others that you are part of this good, honorable majority, all *
* you need to say are nine simple words: "I OPPOSE the Wahhabi cult *
* and its Jihad." *

Version: PGP 6.5.8


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:15 MDT